Have already had 2 mates that I had lunch with today send me emails retracting their lunch time statements.

Extract from the post....

"Since then, we cycling fans have been subjected to the USADA reasoned decision and, as a consequence, the fall of the Yellow Curtain. Cycling has taken a kicking. Time and time again I have been in discussion with fans of other sports trying to justify my love of this so called joke of a sport. It has been hard work. Often I have wanted to fire off Tweets or emails laced with my own unique brand of diplomacy. Diplomacy laced with F bombs and other school yard taunts. For once, I have resisted the urge. "

Last edited by norbs on Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

When non-cyclists talk about how drug riddled cycling is I always say that it only appears that way because cycling is actually doing something about it and refer them to Operation Puerto. There were 200 athletes from cycling, tennis, football and athletics incriminated and yet the only sport that did anything about it was cycling. They actually banned the suspect cyclists from competing in the 2006 TDF without requiring any further evidence. Every other sport has kept the names of suspected athletes under wraps to this day.

The court case for Eufemiano Fuentes is finally taking place now so, hopefully, the rest of the sports / athletes can be revealed.

I think the spotlight will be thrown on other sport with a bit bit more vigilance from now on. Cycling is probably in the best position having "cleaned out the cupboards" early on. All the punters aren't so stupid to think that cheating doesn't happen in other sports.

I actually really don't care what they say - what the pro cyclists do or don't do doesn't matter to me. I don't follow racing and I'm not involved in racing myself at a club level. I'm not even a member of any cycling organisations or clubs, and I doubt I ever will be.

TDC wrote:I think the spotlight will be thrown on other sport with a bit bit more vigilance from now on.

g-boaf wrote:I actually really don't care what they say - what the pro cyclists do or don't do doesn't matter to me. I don't follow racing and I'm not involved in racing myself at a club level. I'm not even a member of any cycling organisations or clubs, and I doubt I ever will be.

Neither do I but I do have children and I don't want them thinking that it's OK to take PEDs to become a professional athlete.

g-boaf wrote:I actually really don't care what they say - what the pro cyclists do or don't do doesn't matter to me. I don't follow racing and I'm not involved in racing myself at a club level. I'm not even a member of any cycling organisations or clubs, and I doubt I ever will be.

Neither do I but I do have children and I don't want them thinking that it's OK to take PEDs to become a professional athlete.

That's something you do yourself though to teach them right from wrong. And you can do it better than some journalist or blogger can.

It's a fair point norbs. You gotta think that AFL players - basically running a marathon with footballs each week - would get as much a boost from EPO as rugby players could from steroids/HGH. But the drug testing regime in footy is a joke compared to cycling. And not by inadvertence, I suspect.

But while other sports have not yet come clean, cycling has proven to be dirty... and the UCI is having a hard time getting to grips with the problem, even after the Lance disasters. There are proven doping cheats stripped of major titles scheduled to ride in top events including the Tour de France this year.

So +1 to Sydguy's comment, let's embrace the spotlight, kick out the doping cheats, and hold other sports and players to cycling's eventual new improved standards.

Well, yes and no for me. I'm not going to stop complaining about doping in cycling until the UCI management changes and there are no longer well-known, unrepentant dopers in the peloton or managing pro teams. In short, I think cycling has a long way to go, and if fans take the pressure off now, things could easily become as bad as they were a few years ago.

That said, I agree that there are plenty of other sports that are now in a worse place than cycling. Tennis is undoubtedly one. Football is another. For the last few days, I've been folling the Twitter feed of this dude: @Giggs_Boson - he's writing about doping in football, particularly Spanish football. There is a reckoning on its way.

It only seems like cycling is riddled with PED use because at the elite level it is in fact true.

I agree, other sports' time under the microscope will come, so it is perhaps a little unfair in that regard. However, we NEED the microscope right where it is right now, because there is a serious problem in our sport that has been in residence for most of its history. I don't believe the UCI can be reformed. Time to toss it out and start over.

I never thought I'd say this, as I loathe its inseparability from the corrosive impacts of gambling and the myth of wealth without work, but there is a lot we can learn from the horse racing industry.

What I desperately want to avoid is cycling entering a situation where those who win are those prepared to accept the most risk to their long term health and quality of life, or we end up becoming a joke entertainment like WWF. This would be the inevitable outcome of faliing to take this present opportunity.

Not only would that be heartbreaking, given the critical and strategic value of cycling in a post-peak oil sustainable transport future, the damage to its reputation would be a tragedy for society as a whole.

g-boaf wrote:I actually really don't care what they say - what the pro cyclists do or don't do doesn't matter to me. I don't follow racing and I'm not involved in racing myself at a club level. I'm not even a member of any cycling organisations or clubs, and I doubt I ever will be.

TDC wrote:I think the spotlight will be thrown on other sport with a bit bit more vigilance from now on.

Essendon Bombers?

Im not going to be able to avoid that anywhere am I

master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.

Yes. It is true. Cycling has been getting an inordinate amount of attention from the involvement of Armstrong and his pulling power. All SA cycling did was have him over for a week and the event and it got world wide attention apparently in excess of what it justified.

As for clean now? Well, ever since 1998 to at least 1995 it was dirty even on the scungy standard of pro cycling over the ages. Yet the media gave it a dream run until less than a year ago. So why winge now and claim an unfair rap? It got a damned generous rap for years. Indeed, immediatley after the substantial embarrassment of the Astina affair 1998 (from memory) the media forgave, got onto the Lance wagon and mostly forgot all about the scandal of Astina.

It IS NOT an unfair conspiracy to treat cycling worse than other sports deserving of the same. This particular scandal stands out in the world of sport.

So, as cycling take the enhanced benefits then it gets to take the same in disbenefits if it does wrong. I hope the media give the story it the legs it deserves and it does not quickly fade as the Astina scandal did.

BTW by any measure this scandal is not one that can be peddled as the same as a whole lot of sports. It is a standout. It deserves attention and is, at last getting it.

To those who say how much cycling is doing to combat drugs compared to others and how bad other sports are, cycling has been dirty for aeons. And while cycling touted it's superior testing numbers 1999-2012, we now know how dishonest that eexercise was as the UCI did it's utmost to make sure that that testing regime was just an expensive PR exercise - counting the stats while helping cheats to not be caught.

Over the decades, cycling got bugger all bad press from it that the public noticed. In recent years it has become more popular and more noticed and has basked in the glory. Now it gets to pay the piper. Nothing conspiratorial or unfair about that.

And at the end of the day, on a personal context, so what? Did I dope? Do my friends shun me because they think I dope? If your answer to those is the same as mine then you have nothing to be embarrassed or defensive about. However if you feel the need to defend the sport against charges that are in demonstrably true, then you will have a hard time of it. In which case my advice is to NOT defend the indefensible. I think the publi are more or less of the same mind that cycists should be - shocked and critical.

Last edited by ColinOldnCranky on Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Endurance sports that don't need a huge amount of talent / skills are always going to have a problem with drugs... ALWAYS. An endurance cyclist's body is just a motor... bigger motors win more races.If you gave me a good PED program I could jump up a grade or two easily enough... give me all the drugs in the world and I would still be crap at tennis.

toolonglegs wrote:Endurance sports that don't need a huge amount of talent / skills are always going to have a problem with drugs... ALWAYS. An endurance cyclist's body is just a motor... bigger motors win more races.If you gave me a good PED program I could jump up a grade or two easily enough... give me all the drugs in the world and I would still be crap at tennis.

I like your point.

It is not high-board diving or dancing or kicking and marking a footy or the range of skills that basketballers carry. That is not to say it is not attractive. But by it's nature it lends itself to greater benefits in PEDs than would apply ina host of other poular sprots.

I may as well chuck out that EPO and those steroids I have before I head to the golf course.

toolonglegs wrote:Endurance sports that don't need a huge amount of talent / skills are always going to have a problem with drugs... ALWAYS. An endurance cyclist's body is just a motor... bigger motors win more races.If you gave me a good PED program I could jump up a grade or two easily enough... give me all the drugs in the world and I would still be crap at tennis.

I know stuff all about competitive endurance cycling, but I think I've read enough to know that there are tactics involved. There are times to push yourself hard, and other times in the race to hold back and save your energy for the right moment. [Hell, I've seen this in action even on my commutes where I've decided today's the day to try to beat my PB time riding home on a commuting course with a nice mixture of hills and flats ]. How can PEDs help you make these decisions? They may give you more brute force strength and endurance, but they won't do your thinking for you.

By the way, I am sick of cycling being singled out for highlighting the PED use, but that's just an extension of the way cyclists are treated in our motorist-dominated societies. Some people just love to single out minorities for derision and bullying, and I'm sad to say Australians are pretty good at that.

Last edited by VRE on Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

toolonglegs wrote:Endurance sports that don't need a huge amount of talent / skills are always going to have a problem with drugs... ALWAYS. An endurance cyclist's body is just a motor... bigger motors win more races.If you gave me a good PED program I could jump up a grade or two easily enough... give me all the drugs in the world and I would still be crap at tennis.

I know stuff all about competitive endurance cycling, but I think I've read enough to know that there are tactics involved. There are times to push yourself hard, and other times in the race to hold back and save your energy for the right moment. How can PEDs help you make these decisions? They may give you more brute force strength and endurance, but they won't do your thinking for you.

By the way, I am sick of cycling being singled out for highlighting the PED use, but that's just an extension of the way cyclists are treated in our motorist-dominated societies. Some people just love to single out minorities for derision and bullying, and I'm sad to say Australians are pretty good at that.

The cream has already risen to or close to the top before the drug problem is raised... ie:- you were probably a pretty good cyclist before you started drugs so you will just be a better one after wards.

toolonglegs wrote:Endurance sports that don't need a huge amount of talent / skills are always going to have a problem with drugs... ALWAYS. An endurance cyclist's body is just a motor... bigger motors win more races.If you gave me a good PED program I could jump up a grade or two easily enough... give me all the drugs in the world and I would still be crap at tennis.

I know stuff all about competitive endurance cycling, but I think I've read enough to know that there are tactics involved. There are times to push yourself hard, and other times in the race to hold back and save your energy for the right moment. How can PEDs help you make these decisions? They may give you more brute force strength and endurance, but they won't do your thinking for you.

By the way, I am sick of cycling being singled out for highlighting the PED use, but that's just an extension of the way cyclists are treated in our motorist-dominated societies. Some people just love to single out minorities for derision and bullying, and I'm sad to say Australians are pretty good at that.

The cream has already risen to or close to the top before the drug problem is raised... ie:- you were probably a pretty good cyclist before you started drugs so you will just be a better one after wards.